Topic: @THEYMOS Abusive group punished DT1 for speaking up against them - page 5. (Read 3497 times)

Did LFC scam anyone, I missed that part.

Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe LFC was just trying to be polite to bill?  Maybe he wasn't actually intimidated by Lauda, but merely convinced?  It's kind of convenient for bill to portray it as intimidation, now isn't it?

this thread has been up for 6 years, and it very clearly says to publish PM logs if you are making a scam accusation.

There is no reason why you should expect privacy if you send a PM unencrypted. Period.

I will repeat myself that if you don’t want a PM published in which you said something embarrassing, you should not send a PM containing something embarrassing.

Responding too quickly usually leads to this; this isn't IM. I edit quite often within the first few minutes of posting.

Now answer.

I like the Italian style, makes me feel home.

Well we seem to have finished discussing what needed to be discussed, but I noticed I missed this gem. Its an interesting ethical situation that goes both ways sometimes and with mixed results, at the risk of getting into a conversation that may hit a little too close to home for the public, if you don't mind I'm going to change the scenario just a tad.

I'm going to stick with the Lauda mafia boss analogy we've been going with here. LFC spilled the beans to you for your sake, because if they did so publicly they'd get "whacked". Then you confront Don Lauda with that information and LFC gets whacked. RIP.

Anyway, whats done is done, but in the future maybe consider the intent and implied privacy behind a private message versus something public. I'm with FH on this one, its bad practice.

Lol, you remind me of a manipulative teenager who refuses to take "no" for an answer.

Bill, you keep digging yourself even deeper.  After some private conversations we had, I added you to my trust list.  I was this close to buying a GPU from you and I would have sent the funds to you upfront without a second thought.

This situation has nothing to do with your interaction with Vod, and your insistence that it does is a convenient delusion.  I decided to remove you from my trust list for that interaction, because I thought you were being frivolous with your review.  But I didn't explicitly ~distrust you and likely would still have sent you $400 without a second thought.

Now I have you explicitly distrusted.  You don't belong on DT, in my opinion.  The trust you gained from the community was rooted in dishonesty and deception.  For three and half years you have deceived this community for your own financial gain.  

Then you publish a private discussion from someone you "consider a friend" and throw that friend under the bus?  In a bid to try to prove you're still trustworthy?

What a joke!


That's completely irrelevant.  The confidential part is the relevant part, and how can anyone have any confidence in you going forward?

Are you saying that you deserve a point, because you edited your post and added that in after I had already responded - now to act as though it has been avoided?
Confused.

Point.

Which part of what we're going through right now is a conspiracy?
Other than bozo's claim that I have half a dozen alts, by their count.

By conspiracy, do you mean you have a different way to explain your lazy DT manipulation? Or are we talking about something else?
You speak so ambiguously, I wish you had it in you to say what's really on your mind.


It's amazing to me that you don't see a problem with why they wanted it kept confidential. They are a legendary member, on DT1, that has been respected for years and they are afraid of what Lauda will do to them if they don't bend the knee. I don't keep your information recorded anywhere and that goes for everyone I've ever done a deal with.

Seems like your brain is broken being unable to provide proof of scam for over 2 years now.

LFC provided the ultimate proof of your abuse and why your bitches are abusing the feedback system with you in the control position.

You must be very pissed about the PM when looking all the hate Bill is getting for it from your monkeys.


Remember such punks like you would be instantly get eaten by me but you are no men enough to reveal your identity you PUSSY

Until you decided to release a PM that was CLEARLY sent in the spirit of being kept confidential, I wasn't worried about either.

I do ever since Quickscammer tried to attack my reputation 3 years ago with pathetic conspiracy theories. That worked out nicely for him. The stupid likes to project. Do you truly believe in your intimidation claims mr. liar?

OJ Simpson

Lauda.

I didn't, he know's it, QS doesn't like me  

Who talks like that?


It's truly saddening to me that your lack of fear towards being DOX'd is stronger than your faith that I would never release such information.
Don't let all that attention go to your head, buddy.

As I said I am only slightly concerned because at the end of the day I'm not all that scared of being dox'd, I've openly stated a number of personally Identifiable things here on this forum.


Feel free to stick the FH wants attention conspiracy theory up your ass where it belongs, I get all the attention thanks though!

Yawn. Were I to intimidate anyone, you wouldn't ever be able to prove any of it. You are a scamming monkey for which about 1% of my brain is needed to beat. All the PMs that were sent out were suggestions and any of them can be published. I didn't put more than 15-20 seconds of writing into most of them, quite the intimidation.

Yeah, I don't care about Lauda in the slightest, because assuming everything everyone is claiming is true, it absolutely doesn't matter in the slightest. Whether you guys still can physically see ratings by Default trust or not, not a single one of the people that has responded here uses it. Thule, when you see negative feedback left by Lauda for someone, do you disregard it? I'm assuming your answer is yes, in which case that means you don't use default trust. Relying on default trust means blindly relying on the feedback left by those users because you don't know any better. Everyone involved here knows better, so they know who's feedback to disregard or value. Everyone is just complaining about a DT mafia because conflict is fun. Like I said, the power of DT is literally the same as a PTA, maybe a little annoying but they don't have any real authority to do anything. When was the last time any of the involved did a trade here? (looks mainly at the collectibles section users) Ok, does Lauda or anyone else's feedback mean anything to you if you've been trading within this community for years and know who to trust? And if you aren't certain, or are trading with a new user do you just use Minerjones as escrow? Cool, problem solved.

Just to clarify, all of this DT red trust and such is about your feelings being hurt, not that it'll affect your account in any way. Thats fine, but everyone can tell what it is, this massive conflict is because of hurt feelings, not for the greater good and justice.

It's funny, putting those two quotes together, let's play a guessing game! Can anybody tell me why that's humorous?

The 60-day ban would've been good for burying a string of coincidences and abuses.


How well has that been working out for anyone that has been unable to produce a source/justification for their claims?
There's a handful of users sitting in here on Newbie accounts, because they're likely DT members afraid of similar consequence.

If we keep doing this circular "Lauda is a boogieman" act, where all we have are stories of old we are not going to get anywhere.
There are concrete examples of abuse, intimidation, coercion, etc. and refusing to pin down the details is one of the things that makes the situation slippery.

You're right, maybe producing the PM or at least attaching the username was a move in bad-taste.
I'm not here to make LFC look bad, they know that and I think they understand where I am coming from to a degree.



Out of curiosity, how would one get the consent to investigate a murder?

Why do you always twist words like that? Where did he say that it against the forum rules?